The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

No sound at all here on the HK protests? Massive massive protests in HK after attempts to pass a bill that would legalise extradition of HK residents to mainland China for offenses. Youth came out in masses, protested trying to enter the legislative council building. Coordinated using telegram (which subsequently faced ddos attacks - I wonder why), people stood in line to buy tickets at hte ticket counters for the metro instead of using metrocards to avoid gettingtracked. Also faces covered, carried umbrellas to tackle pepper spray. Eventually cleared by use of tear gas and rubber bullets. Typical cheen riot police tactics but must have rattled beijing.

ChaguanWhy Hong Kong’s protesters are braving tear gas and rubber bulletsMany people fear the loss of freedom as Xi Jinping seeks to assert greater control over the territoryA POWERFUL INSIGHT of modern psychology is that humans are hard-wired to fear loss, and will take greater risks to avoid it than to realise a gain. Such insights help to explain protests that have paralysed central Hong Kong in recent days. On June 9th hundreds of thousands of people—over a million, organisers say—peacefully marched in opposition to a government bill that would allow extraditions from Hong Kong to mainland China. Things turned nastier on June 12th, when protesters surrounded the Legislative Council building and forced a delay in the debate on the bill, scoring a temporary victory. As protesters blocked streets with metal barriers and hurled water bottles, police fired tear gas and rubber bullets, and threatened to use more force to disperse the crowds.

Hong Kong’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, appointed by a panel of local loyalists of the Communist Party in Beijing, talks of “plugging a loophole” with the bill. She says opponents will leave the territory a refuge for fugitives. That is to suggest that previous leaders somehow forgot to draft rules for sending criminal suspects to China.

In fact, there was no omission, says Margaret Ng, a barrister who represented the legal profession in Hong Kong’s legislature from 1995 to 2012, under first British then Chinese rule. When drafting an extradition law before the handover in 1997 officials took a deliberate decision to maintain a firewall between Hong Kong’s justice system and that of the mainland, “to protect the rule of law in Hong Kong and confidence in Hong Kong as an international hub free from China’s much mistrusted system.”

China’s law courts explicitly serve as instruments of party control, rather than as any check on state power. Hong Kong authorities note that the extradition bill excludes those accused of political crimes. That offers no reassurance, retort opponents: Chinese dissidents routinely face trumped-up charges like bribery or blackmail.

The prospect of losing the legal firewall between Hong Kong and China, in a bill that is being rushed with minimal debate, is what brought out vast crowds, many dressed in white, the colour of mourning. Several confided that this was their first time at a political demonstration. Such scenes are a surprise. By now, 22 years after the British colony became a Special Administrative Region of China, its people were supposed to have accepted the fate envisioned for them by rulers in Beijing: a life of well-fed but politically neutered domestication, like so many golden-egg laying geese. Rewards are on offer for those who comply.

Communist leaders pledged that Hong Kong’s capitalist system, independent courts and Western-style freedoms of speech and assembly would be preserved for 50 years, under the slogan “one country, two systems”. There were ambiguous promises that Hong Kong might move towards democratic elections for its legislature and for the post of chief executive.

Increasingly, though, that emphasis on autonomy has been being replaced by proposals that would leave Hong Kong merely the wealthiest and most international city in China. Hong Kong remains valuable as a global financial centre. But Communist bosses increasingly expect Hong Kong to know its place. The territory represented over 18% of China’s GDP when British rule ended in 1997, but less than 3% in 2018. Ms Lam has promoted integration with the “Greater Bay Area”, a region spanning Hong Kong, Macau and the mainland province of Guangdong.

The costs of defiance, meanwhile, have risen. In 2003 authorities shelved an anti-sedition law that Beijing wanted to impose on Hong Kong, after large street marches. Since then the central government has grown less patient, notably after Xi Jinping became party leader in 2012. In April this year several leaders of Occupy Central (also known as the Umbrella Movement), a pro-democracy campaign of civil disobedience that blocked streets for weeks in 2014, were jailed for up to 16 months for causing “excessive inconvenience” during those protests, in the words of a Hong Kong judge. Politicians have been barred from running for office unless they pledge loyalty to China.

When Chaguan last year met Benny Tai, a rumpled law professor from Hong Kong University and an Occupy Central leader, he sadly wondered when his city might witness large demonstrations again. “People are concerned that it is not safe to protest, especially in the business sector,” he sighed. He talked of “holding the line” while waiting for democracy in mainland China. It would be interesting to hear Mr Tai’s views now, but he is currently in prison.

An American newspaper this week asked if China had created a million new dissidents in Hong Kong. That is to mistake the mood. The protesters are not marching to gain new freedoms, but to avoid losing those that they still have. Anson Chan, who served as chief secretary of the Hong Kong government under the British and for the first four years of Chinese rule, spent four and half hours among the marchers on Sunday. Many probably “held out very slim hope that the government will change these proposals”, she says. “But they wanted to stand up and be counted.”

Fighting without hope of winning

In commentaries intended for overseas consumption, Chinese state media accuse “foreign forces” of trying to create “havoc” in Hong Kong. Actually, though the British and American governments have expressed concern about the extradition bill, and Congress could revoke trade and visa privileges granted to Hong Kong, this movement’s backers include prominent, local lawyers, priests and entrepreneurs. Politicians and scholars have drafted moderate compromise proposals, including a one-off arrangement to send to Taiwan a murder suspect whose case is the ostensible pretext for amending extradition laws.

It is a clarifying rebuke for China’s rulers. Exposure to their version of the rule of law feels like an unbearable loss to many in Hong Kong, outweighing the rewards of integration with a faster-growing China. Assuming that the extradition law is rammed through anyway, it will be a win for fear and resignation, not love.

BISHKEK: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thursday raised the issue of Pakistan-sponsored terror during his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the SCO summit and made it clear that Islamabad must take concrete action against terrorism affecting India.

Giving details of the meeting, foreign secretary Vijay Gokhale said "PM Modi told Xi Jinping that Pakistan needs to create atmosphere free of terror and at this stage we do not see this happening."

PM Modi reminded the Chinese president that India has made efforts for peace and these efforts have been derailed. "We expect Pakistan to take concrete action," PM Modi told Xi.

The Prime Minister stated that India's position has been consistent that it wants peaceful relations with Pakistan, the foreign secretary said.

PM Modi's comments came ahead of President Xi's meeting with Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, who is also here in the Kyrgyz capital to attend the SCO summit.

Imran Khan has twice written to Prime Minister Modi, seeking resumption of dialogue on all issues, including Kashmir.

Responding to Khan's overtures, Prime Minister Modi told his Pakistani counterpart that creating trust and an environment free of violence and terrorism was essential for fostering peace and prosperity in the region.

India has not been engaging with Pakistan since an attack on the Air Force base at Pathankot in January of 2016 by a Pakistan-based terror group, maintaining that talks and terror cannot go together.

PM Modi also invited Xi Jinping to India for the second informal summit, an invitation which the Chinese president accepted.

PM Modi described his meeting with Xi Jinping "extremely fruitful".

"Had an extremely fruitful meeting with President Xi Jinping. Our talks included the full spectrum of India-China relations. We shall continue working together to improve economic and cultural ties between our nations," Modi tweeted after the delegation-level talks with President Xi.

Had an extremely fruitful meeting with President Xi Jinping. Our talks included the full spectrum of India-China re… https://t.co/h0tAgsHY0F &mdash; Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) 1560428743000

The meeting began with President Xi congratulating Prime Minister Modi over his election victory.

"After the election results in India, I got your message, and today again you have wished me on the victory, I am very grateful to you for this," Modi replied.

Xi had extended "heartfelt congratulations" to Prime Minister Modi for winning the Lok Sabha elections last month, in a rare gesture of greeting a foreign leader well before the official announcement of the results.

"On behalf of all Indians, I wish you a very happy birthday," Modi told Xi, greeting the Chinese leader who will turn 66 on June 15.

"As you said, in the days to come, we both can progress on several subjects. We both have a contemporary tenure to work more," he said.

"After our meeting in Wuhan, we have seen a new momentum and stability in our relations. There has been a rapid progress in the strategic communication between the two sides, leading to be more sensitive towards each other's concerns and interests. And there have been new areas for further cooperation since then," Modi told Xi in his opening remarks.

The 2018 Wuhan summit between Prime Minister Modi and President Xi was largely credited to have turned around the bilateral relations soured by the 73-day Doklam standoff, triggered by Chinese troops attempts to build a road close to Indian border in an area also claimed by Bhutan in 2017.

After the Wuhan summit, both the countries stepped up efforts to improve relations on different spheres including the military-to-military ties.

The two leaders have met more than 10 times in the last five years, including thrice after their informal summit in Wuhan -- first at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit held in June last in China's Qingdao, the second time at the BRICS summit in South Africa's Johannesburg in July and third time in December last on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Argentina.

External affairs ministry spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said the two leaders had a warm meeting. "Leaders discussed all aspects of enriching our bilateral relations and recognised the positive role of strategic communication in deepening our partnership," Kumar said.

Did Xi Jinping bring up Pakistan ? China had asked India not to raise Pakistan in the SCO.

China has been trying to insert itself in our issue with Pakistan. Sometime back, one Chinese 'scholar' went so far as to say that India would have to face a two front war if it continued with its intransigence !

At the first India-China bilateral meeting on the margins of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation at Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan, Modi responded to Xi's suggestion of resumption of the India-Pakistan dialogue by firmly stating that it was a bilateral matter and making it clear that Pakistan has not done enough to restart talks.

the telco guy made the point that it would cost us 500 billion usd and 15 years to replicate huawei tech capability since that is what the chinese have invested into italso it would cost our telcos 60 billion usd to avoid huawei equipment and their stuff costs a third of competitors like nokia ericsson or samsung

iisc is supposedly looking into their equipment but has not found anythingbut there is no guaranteed way to avoid them spying on the data or having a kill switch on the network but we have no alternative if we want 5g

the current situation is even 3G is iffy in middle of blr. periods of network outage also not unknown.can we get our 3G and 4G to singapore cast iron stds nationwide first.there is no urgent need for 5G in india when most of the country lacks even 3G.3G is fine for playing songs, reading.

Singha wrote:the current situation is even 3G is iffy in middle of blr. periods of network outage also not unknown.can we get our 3G and 4G to singapore cast iron stds nationwide first.there is no urgent need for 5G in india when most of the country lacks even 3G.3G is fine for playing songs, reading.

That is not a good idea. The whole purpose of 5G is to build up the level of ecosystem Internet of things in India AS FAST AS WE CAN. Any delay in implementing this revolutionary tech means India going backward and literally on a Bullock cart vs a world that is literally jet powered. This tech percolate s into all levels finance defence economy to say just a few. It multiplies economic opportunities by several magnitudes . No delay should be there in implementing, we cant or shouldn't wait.

the telco guy made the point that it would cost us 500 billion usd and 15 years to replicate huawei tech capability since that is what the chinese have invested into italso it would cost our telcos 60 billion usd to avoid huawei equipment and their stuff costs a third of competitors like nokia ericsson or samsung

iisc is supposedly looking into their equipment but has not found anythingbut there is no guaranteed way to avoid them spying on the data or having a kill switch on the network but we have no alternative if we want 5g

imo one option could be build a grid of free wifi in all of the top500 cities same way google has given free wifi to many railway stations. in some locations people are hovering in and around railway stations to download large files and watch films for free than rely on spotty 3G paid plans.wifi tech is very cheap in comparison to cellular infra. also consumes a lot less battery on phones.obviously "handover" of a moving subscriber may not be so seamless .... but if you provide in low income colonies atleast people esp kids and students can get online from home.will be useful freebie for the upwardly mobile poorer sections.

Singha wrote:yeah but everyone other than Jio is hovering on edges of bankruptcy and our data rate/GB is the lowest in world. preferably people want it all free.who is going to foot the bill?

Singha ji .. a plain simile would be the expressway replacing old roads now I am sure every knows what difference it makes. 5G literally transforms how we do things using internet .. I dare say . It's just not faster but way ahead by a whole magnitude. India cannot afford to be behind since this will affect ALL sectors of economy.We are not going back !!.. we need 5G ..huwaei or not

It is a perfect couple of years - where both our aggressive neighbors are busy with their domestic and international disputes, to extract the maximum juice from them.

NaPak:- Nuke NaPak - will bankrupt themselves with building more nuke. Even if they dont make new ones, old ones will require expensive re-processing. Even if they dont do the re-processing, they have to spend on their security and moving them left n right to protect from USA and other unnamed friends. Even, if they dont that they have to get ride of those which is again quite expensive. And finally even if they dont that, the normal people will have to pay the bill with medicines and deaths.- Conventional NaPak, their Navy is already broke. After Balakot, it is turn of their air force. If they stand on-guard, against India, it will take a toll on their assets. Who is going to finance them to buy newer ones. If they dont stand on-guard, their assets can turned into ashes. Only face saving is their Army, they are being hammered by all side - internally and externally.

China:The golden days to stealing technology are being tighten by all sides especially in USA and Europe. Their currency manipulation is also attracting intention. Their exports are being meeting more resistance. Big MNC companies are not investing big money and technology in China, but withdrawing money from there. It simply means, no new tech coming there for considerable time. They have massive production - which they can neither consume locally nor export. Their OROB was the flagship project which they screwed royally - costing them almost half trillion $s.

So it is perfect time for India to forcefully ask China to settle border dispute first. Similarly with NaPak, to handover back PoK and end terrorism in India.

China increased its retaliatory tariffs hitting US exports on June 1 in response to President Donald Trump’s latest escalation of his trade war. Yet, this action is only half of the bad news for US exporters. The other half is that China has begun rolling out the red carpet for the rest of the world. Everyone else is enjoying much improved access to China’s 1.4 billion consumers, a fact that has been little noticed or reported in accounts of the US-China economic confrontation.

While Trump shows other countries nothing but his tariff stick, China has been offering carrots. Beijing has repeatedly cut its duties on imports from America’s commercial rivals, including Canada, Japan, and Germany.

Trump’s provocations and China’s two-pronged response mean American companies and workers now are at a considerable cost disadvantage relative to both Chinese firms and firms in third countries. The result is one more eerie parallel to the conditions US exporters faced in the 1930s.

Another important implication of China’s action is that Americans are likely suffering more than President Trump thinks due to his trade war. Inflicting such punishment on Americans may be one factor motivating China. A separate motivation may be that it is trying to minimize the harm to its own economy by importing vital goods at better prices from other parts of the world.

China has acknowledged its fishing vessel hit a Filipino boat in the disputed South China Sea in an incident that prompted an outcry in the Philippines but denies the collision was intentional.

The Philippines has filed a diplomatic protest after Filipino fishermen said a Chinese vessel rammed their anchored boat on Sunday night then abandoned them as the boat sank in the Reed Bank. Philippine officials strongly condemned the reported Chinese action.

The Chinese Embassy in Manila said late Friday that the Chinese vessel accidentally hit the Filipino boat as it tried to maneuver while being “besieged” by several Filipino boats. It said the Chinese captain tried to rescue the Filipinos but was afraid of being besieged by other boats.

“There is no such thing as ‘hit-and-run,’” the Chinese Embassy said in a statement, citing the result of a preliminary investigation.

It’s the most serious incident so far in the disputed waters involving fishermen from the two Asian neighbors whose ties have flourished under Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who took office in 2016.

The territorial conflicts, which also involve Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan and Brunei, have long been feared as a potential flashpoint in Asia. Tensions escalated in recent years after China transformed seven disputed reefs into man-made islands, which can serve as forward military outposts and intimidate rival claimants in the strategic waterway. The U.S. has accused China of militarizing the region and has carried out “freedom of navigation” patrols to challenge Beijing’s sweeping claims.

Mr. Duterte has come under criticism for his silence on the incident although his spokesman, Salvador Panelo, described the abandonment of the 22 Filipino fishermen after their boat sank as “uncivilized as it is outrageous.”

Opposition Sen. Risa Hontiveros said the Chinese government’s explanation was “a flimsy attempt at a cover-up to shield the involved Chinese crew from any accountability and shift the blame and responsibility to our distressed fisherfolk.”

If there were seven to eight Filipino fishing boats besieging the Chinese fishing vessel, Hontiveros asked why it was a Vietnamese fishing boat that rescued all the 22 Filipinos, as the Philippine military reported.

Philippine Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio, who has done extensive studies on the South China Sea conflicts, said it was the first time that a Chinese vessel has rammed a Philippine fishing boat in the disputed waters in a “quantum escalation of China’s aggressive acts.” He said it could be the start of a more aggressive campaign to discourage the Philippine presence in an offshore region believed to be rich in undersea gas and oil deposits.

Chinese vessels have rammed Vietnamese fishing boats in another South China Sea region, the Paracel Islands, for years, Justice Carpio said.

The Filipino fishermen, who were brought back home by the Philippine navy, told reporters the Chinese vessel turned around after hitting them and turned lights on, apparently to check on their sinking boat, then left.

“If the Vietnamese were not there, we would have all died,” Filipino boat skipper Junel Insigne told ABS-CBN TV network.

Clearly, the Chinese are lying through their teeth, as they usually do.

The ramming Chinese vessel was most certainly a Chinese Coast Guard vessel masquerading as a fishing vessel.

https://www.spiegel.de/international/wo ... 72274.htmlThe Voice of BeijingChina's Expanding Media Dominance in AfricaChinese state television is gaining influence in Africa. But while the media outlets involved officially claim their journalism is independent, those who work for the companies tell a different story.By Bartholomäus Grill, June 14, 2019 An interview? Or perhaps just a discussion on background? "We have no interest in speaking with you," Liao Liang writes in an email. And, thank you for understanding, but a visit to his television broadcaster in Nairobi isn't possible either, he writes. Indeed, the rejection is so complete, it's as though he is protecting a state secret.Yet Liao Liang's mission in the Kenyan capital is hardly confidential: As a senior editor of the China Global Television Network (CGTN), a subsidiary of Chinese state television, his task is that of shining a positive light on his country's ambitious activities -- particularly those in Africa, where China's reputation has suffered as its footprint has grown.The broadcaster occupies three floors in the K-Rep Centre, a mirrored-glass high-rise in the upscale neighborhood of Kilimani. The first security check comes right at the building entrance, including a pat-down and questions from the suspicious receptionist. After that, though, there's no getting by the next receptionist on the third floor. "To be honest," she says with fake regret, "there is no chance you'll be allowed to see Mr. Liao."Liao Liang is top dog at the broadcaster. He was allegedly an army officer in a previous life, but little else is known about him. CGTN employs around 150 people, including journalists from China, South Africa, Britain, Nigeria and Kenya, yet even when promised anonymity, nobody initially agreed to speak with DER SPIEGEL. "They're afraid of Liao," an employee would later say."Tell China's story well," instructed Chinese President Xi Jinping three years ago when he visited the broadcaster's headquarters in Beijing. CGTN journalists aren't just there to ward off criticism of China's expansion in Africa but also to break the West's media dominance. The broadcaster has a similar mission in Africa as Russia's state broadcaster RT does in Europe.A New Form of ColonialismIn the last two decades, China has developed into Africa's strongest economic partner, with an annual trade volume of far more than $200 billion, a total that is much higher than Africa's trade with the United States or with former colonial powers like France and the United Kingdom. And China's foothold in the region goes beyond goods and services. Two years ago, the country established a naval base in the East African country of Djibouti. And it is thought that over a million Chinese now call Africa home. In many countries, they are seen as conquerors who aren't just interested in natural resources and new markets, but also in permanently settling there. According to one survey, the majority of Africans welcome the Chinese involvement, but critics, such as the Senegalese author Adama Gaye, have warned of a new form of colonialism.In order to burnish its image, Beijing has turned to instruments of soft power. China has thrown its support behind diplomatic initiatives and has contributed around 2,500 troops to UN peacekeeping missions in Congo, South Sudan and Mali. China is also helping with efforts to combat the Ebola epidemic and it even funded the construction of the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa. The country has also established 49 Confucius Institutes across the continent, which promote the Chinese language and culture......Gautam

Many schools across Nepal have made it mandatory for students to learn Mandarin lured by the Chinese government’s offer to cover salaries of teachers who teach the language, a media report said on Saturday.

Principals and staff of at least 10 renowned private schools told The Himalayan Times that Mandarin was a compulsory subject in their institutions.

Many more private schools in Pokhara, Dhulikhel and other parts of the country have also made Mandarin compulsory for students, according to Shiv Raj Pant, board of trustee, founder and chairman of LRI School.

“Schools are allowed to teach foreign languages, but they cannot make those subjects mandatory for students,” said Ganesh Prasad Bhattarai, information officer at the Curriculum Development Centre, a government body which designs school—level academic curriculum.

“If a subject has to be made compulsory, it is us who take the decisions, not the schools.”

Schools that spoke to The Himalayan Times were aware of this rule, but they have simply overlooked it, as they are getting Mandarin teachers for free.

“We introduced Mandarin as a compulsory subject two years ago after the Chinese Embassy agreed to provide teachers free of cost,” said Kuldip Neupane, principal at United School.

Other schools also confirmed that salaries of Mandarin teachers were being paid by the Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu.

“We only need to provide stipend to Chinese teachers to cover their accommodation and food costs,” said Hari Dahal, principal of Apex Life School.

“We know children should be allowed to make choices. So, if there are volunteers who wish to teach Japanese and German, we will always welcome them,” Khyam Nath Timsina, principal of Shuvatara School said.

SSridhar wrote:Mandarin made mandatory in many Nepal schools: report - IANSMany schools across Nepal have made it mandatory for students to learn Mandarin lured by the Chinese government’s offer to cover salaries of teachers who teach the language, a media report said on Saturday.

Principals and staff of at least 10 renowned private schools told The Himalayan Times that Mandarin was a compulsory subject in their institutions.

Many more private schools in Pokhara, Dhulikhel and other parts of the country have also made Mandarin compulsory for students, according to Shiv Raj Pant, board of trustee, founder and chairman of LRI School.

“Schools are allowed to teach foreign languages, but they cannot make those subjects mandatory for students,” said Ganesh Prasad Bhattarai, information officer at the Curriculum Development Centre, a government body which designs school—level academic curriculum.

“If a subject has to be made compulsory, it is us who take the decisions, not the schools.”

Schools that spoke to The Himalayan Times were aware of this rule, but they have simply overlooked it, as they are getting Mandarin teachers for free.

“We introduced Mandarin as a compulsory subject two years ago after the Chinese Embassy agreed to provide teachers free of cost,” said Kuldip Neupane, principal at United School.

Other schools also confirmed that salaries of Mandarin teachers were being paid by the Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu.

“We only need to provide stipend to Chinese teachers to cover their accommodation and food costs,” said Hari Dahal, principal of Apex Life School.

“We know children should be allowed to make choices. So, if there are volunteers who wish to teach Japanese and German, we will always welcome them,” Khyam Nath Timsina, principal of Shuvatara School said.

In a renewed attempt to break the stalemate in the ongoing Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) negotiations involving 16 countries, senior officials from India and China met in New Delhi this week to try and reach a common ground on market opening commitments.

“We are trying to reduce the gap between the market access being demanded by China and what India has to offer. Till this matter is resolved it will be difficult to make progress in the overall RCEP negotiations,” a government official told BusinessLine. The Indian and Chinese delegations that participated in the meeting on June 10-11 were headed by Commerce Secretary Anup Wadhawan and Chinese Vice-Minister of Commerce Wang Shouwen, respectively.

The RCEP, being negotiated between the 10-member ASEAN, India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, once implemented, would result in one of the largest free trade bloc accounting for 45 per cent of the world's population, and a combined GDP of about $21.3 trillion and 40 per cent of world trade. India, however, is not comfortable with the steep commitments on opening markets in goods being pushed by most members, especially China. New Delhi wants to offer much lower market access in goods to China compared to other members such as the ASEAN, Japan and South Korea, but Beijing is not willing to accept it.

“In the two-day meeting, discussions happened on goods, services as well as investments. While there was some positive movement in services with China paring its demand, a lot more progress needs to be achieved in goods and investments,” the official said.

India, which has so far offered to eliminate tariffs for 70-80 per cent of goods for China over an extended period of time, is unwilling to give more as the Indian industry is apprehensive of being adversely hit due to it. “China already runs a trade surplus of over $60 billion with India and the domestic industry is reeling under heavy competition from Chinese goods. The government can't let the situation go out of hand,” the official said.

A decision, however, has to be taken by the new Commerce & Industry Minister Piyush Goyal soon on how much more flexible India could get. China is already hinting at going in for a free trade agreement between the ASEAN, China, Japan and South Korea if the RCEP talks take too long. The ASEAN, too, is putting pressure on India to move fast so that the negotiations could be completed by the year-end.

“There are a number of technical discussions scheduled in Melbourne at the end of the month. By then, India should be clear on its negotiating flexibilities,” the official said.

^^^ Even if we get Cheen to back down we'll still get clobbered by the other 15 members.

If the US feels raped by NAFTA what do you think will happen to us in this thing?

I'm a free marketer by heart (my job more or less demands it.) But I also know that Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Cheen, etc. got to where they are by protecting their own markets first.

ASEAN and the Northeast Asian triumvirate of Cheen, Japan and Korea have interlocking supply chains that we are not part of. We will be nothing but a market. Even with Cheen out, it would be the same. It is a very unnatural block for India.

RCEP is worth being in. But not now. Not yet. If we are forced into it now we'll be hollowed out by everyone even if Cheen gives concessions (big if.)

Naturally Sridhar Garu Ji. As I have stated in the Past Terroristan is on its way to becoming Pakziang just like Xinjiang!

Then India will have to "Guard only One Border: That will happen when Terroristan becomes Pakziang and the Chinese will send may be 200 Million Hans or even 250 Million Hans so as to reduce the World's only Religion of Peace in the Land of the Pure and home of the Terrorists to a Minority as they have done in Xinjiang.

I dont understand the ASEAN, Japan, etc ... their markets will be flooded by Chinese like never before once free market access is granted. China has so much surplus supply backed n funded by the CPC. It will ruin their industries and innovation. Like RBI, I would let the ASEAN or whoever else want to sign contract with China. But we should stay out of it. We must not sign any free trade policy with any of those countries as Chinese imports will flood India. In fact, we should tight the screw on imports from China as we are not getting access to their market. Additionally, there is no fixed rules for locals (forget SDREs) once you are in China. Show is run and managed by the CPC party members.

RKumar, what you say is perfectly valid. But, then, why is GoI continuing with RCEP discussions which were held up for the last 6 months specifically because of Indian (also Indonesian) elections? Why aren't we walking out? The rest of RCEP countries are demanding that we cut import tariffs. We have to rebuff it (I am not sure how long can we hold out) to protect our local industries no doubt but the fact that we have consistently failed to address the quality & cost issues in manufacturing is coming home to roost. Whether we like it or not, we are in for shocks. Manufacturing is our achilles heel while we have (had) potential to be very good in that sector. Usually in these trade discussions, we try to compensate for these 'manufacturing' concessions with demands of greater access to our service sector in those countries. Eventually, we end up losing everywhere.

An agreement China signed with the Maldives to build an observatory in the Indian Ocean is likely to be scrapped, as India’s relations with its maritime neighbour enter a purple patch following the exit of former Maldivian president Abdulla Yameen. Top local government sources in Male told ToI that the agreement Yameen signed with China in 2017, which raised a security alarm in India, is ``not on the table’’.

Titled Protocol on Establishment of Joint Ocean Observation Station, the agreement was meant to allow China to construct an observatory at Makunudhoo, the westernmost atoll of the Maldives in the north.

The finalisation of the agreement had set off concerns in India that it would allow China a vantage point of an important Indian Ocean shipping route through which many merchant and other ships pass. It would also be located uncomfortably close to Indian waters.

Then foreign secretary S Jaishankar, who is now foreign minister, had discussed the issue with then Maldivian envoy Ahmed Mohamed. Without sharing the specifics of the agreement, the envoy had clarified that China was only looking to build a meteorological ocean observation centre. The Yameen government never made the agreement public and following a controversy, after ToI first reported the issue on February 26 last year, Chinese authorities clarified that the observatory was not meant for any military purpose.

In India though, many saw it as yet another move to ensure India’s strategic encirclement. Retired navy officials and strategic experts saw it as an attempt to acquire accurate hydrological data for sub-surface operations including possible deployment of nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) and nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs).

The situation though changed dramatically after the ouster of Yameen and with a government led by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) firmly ensconced. The recent visit by PM Narendra Modi, the first full-fledged visit by an Indian PM in 8 years, saw the inauguration of a coastal surveillance radar system and also a composite training facility for the Maldivian defence forces. In a significant message to the Maldives, which is said to owe more than half of its external debt to China, Modi said during the visit that India’s developmental partnership wasn’t meant to empower others, not weaken them by increasing their dependence on India.

Former president and the most powerful MDP leader, Mohammed Nasheed, remains a staunch supporter of India and was quoted by a newspaper as having said a few days ago that the Maldives shouldn’t even try to balance relations with India and China. He also said that the Maldives can’t afford to have defence cooperation with China.

The discussion says Huawei technology is already used by India for 3G & 4G network !

Even GCHQ is using Huawei Technology for years.

I suspect the Huawei is spying via its network much like CISCO, Nokia or others are doing for decades, The entire wiki leaks and Edward Snowden shows that even smaller things like Yahoo email had a backend to NSA.

So it boils down to Commercial Warfare that is what Huawei and West fight is about, The Chinese seems to be more competitive now in Global market.

Huawei has now closed deals with 52 countries on 5 G !

The only option for India no matter where we buy 5G from China or West is to have a dedicated DRDO Labs that vets the hardware/software for spying bugs etc from Nokia Huawei etc like GCHQ does and work with these companies to see what is a cost-effective option

Calling for China to maintain status quo in the Doklam region, Bhutan’s Prime Minister Lotay Tshering said “no side” should do anything near the trijunction point between India, China and Bhutan “unilaterally”.

In an exclusive interview to The Hindu , and the first public comments by the Bhutanese leader on the Doklam issue which had seen a near conflict between the Indian and Chinese armies in 2017, he said that as long as status quo was maintained, “there will be peace and tranquillity in the region.”

Mr. Tshering was reacting to a question about the recent reports of an unprecedented build-up of military infrastructure on the Chinese side of the Doklam plateau that has been part of a boundary dispute between Bhutan and China.

He said the boundary talks between the two sides had made good progress, however, with 25 rounds completed. Asked whether the talks could lead to diplomatic ties being established, he reiterated Bhutan’s policy of not establishing ties with any permanent member of the UN Security Council.

Mr. Tshering also called on India and Pakistan to work together for the growth of South Asia and said it was “too early” to call the SAARC unviable. His comments follow calls by Sri Lanka’s President Maithripala Sirisena and Nepal’s Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli to revive the SAARC, which hasn’t held a summit since 2014.

SSridhar may be, we are half as clever as compared to GoI. But time to time, I am surprised by the decisions taken by GoI. There are no way to find, why much stupid (sorry for using the word) decisions are taken? Let's hope, GoI and FinMin have a better understanding of the situation and walk off from such deals.

On the other side, I am also afraid GoI and MoD signing some pacts with USA. For me these are no go pacts!! History is a witness, no amount of proofs provided by India will be enough to prove that they violated the pacts. There must be enough clauses to withdraw from these pacts without any justification if we are being arm twisted to sign on the dotted lines.

india already has a system wherein vendors need to submit code for vetting. but HW based probes like a little extra block in a RF chip that can act as backdoor or kill switch is very hard to detect - because samples submitted for test may be clean but not the ones deployed later.

in a mysterious incident this week , entire argentina and uruguay lost power for many hours. no clear root cause yet. could be shadow play "kill the chicken to scare the wolf" tactics.

every american web giant has fat pipes for real time data sucking into the NSA - that is known and part of everyones calculation.

Singha wrote:india already has a system wherein vendors need to submit code for vetting. but HW based probes like a little extra block in a RF chip that can act as backdoor or kill switch is very hard to detect - because samples submitted for test may be clean but not the ones deployed later.

in a mysterious incident this week , entire argentina and uruguay lost power for many hours. no clear root cause yet. could be shadow play "kill the chicken to scare the wolf" tactics.

every american web giant has fat pipes for real time data sucking into the NSA - that is known and part of everyones calculation.

Dan Brown (author of Da Vinci Code) wrote a novel about NSA access to private data years and years before Snowden, Julian Assange made it common knowledge. I think it was called Angels and Demons, not sure about the title though.

I had posted a while back about hosting here in Trivandrum, a khanlander who is a grizzled veteran of cold war era EMP attacks and was in their hallowed NSB. I was with him for half a day and mostly his visit was about geothermal cooling of a vast private facility which is being build here. But we ended up talking about the grid security issues of khan. He says an average of 10 verifiable attacks happen daily against the grid, mostly by lizard, followed by bear. I asked why bear does it, because lizard one understands (it is in their nature to act bigger than they are).

He is an old fashioned electrical engineer with decades of experience in maintaining khan's grids and is still in their EMP task force. He shrugs and says all sides are practicing daily on newer measures and counters.

Basically khan, that major fountainhead of fundamental sciences on earth, cannot conclusively stop such attacks on something as basic as powergrid, due to the nature of modern networked world! So we can bet our backsides that India is also constantly being attacked by all sides and no amount of defensive play of security certifications or luddite bans on tech is going to go far. Maybe a few grid controllers can be kept in a faraday cage scenario for doomdsay situation, but not day-to-day needs.

So my inference is Huawei issue is 400% commercial considerations by President Tang-appan.

The discussion says Huawei technology is already used by India for 3G & 4G network !

Even GCHQ is using Huawei Technology for years.

I suspect the Huawei is spying via its network much like CISCO, Nokia or others are doing for decades, The entire wiki leaks and Edward Snowden shows that even smaller things like Yahoo email had a backend to NSA.

So it boils down to Commercial Warfare that is what Huawei and West fight is about, The Chinese seems to be more competitive now in Global market.

Huawei has now closed deals with 52 countries on 5 G !

The only option for India no matter where we buy 5G from China or West is to have a dedicated DRDO Labs that vets the hardware/software for spying bugs etc from Nokia Huawei etc like GCHQ does and work with these companies to see what is a cost-effective option

Read or heard within the past week that Huawei is too large/strong. And that both Erickson and Nokia are at the mercy of Huawei. IIRC, the person said that both these companies are there only because Huawei allows them to be there.